Why hasn't somebody claimed responsibility, if it's a terrorist group?
The point of terrorist groups blowing things up is to terrify people, not to terrify them randomly but to make them sufficiently terrified of them that they will give them their objectives. This doesn't work if you don't know who did it. Therefore, terrorist groups claim responsibility. Which makes the "lone nut" theory more plausible.
If you want crazy theories, how about Unionist kneecappers from Northern Ireland doing it to get revenge on Boston for funding the IRA? (But they'd have claimed responsibility.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2013-04-17 11:34 am (UTC)The point of terrorist groups blowing things up is to terrify people, not to terrify them randomly but to make them sufficiently terrified of them that they will give them their objectives. This doesn't work if you don't know who did it. Therefore, terrorist groups claim responsibility. Which makes the "lone nut" theory more plausible.
If you want crazy theories, how about Unionist kneecappers from Northern Ireland doing it to get revenge on Boston for funding the IRA? (But they'd have claimed responsibility.)